Inside the Struggle to Dismantle America's Greenhouse Gas Data
DeSmog (in partnership with the National Security Archive)Rachel Santarsiero18 Aug 2026all-rights-reservedRead the original
DeSmog uses no named Creative Commons licence. Custom republishing terms: material may not be edited without express written permission, authors must be credited in the byline with a link, images may not be republished unless separately CC-licensed, material may not be sold separately, and articles may not be systematically republished. DeSmog reserves the right to demand removal.
DeSmog, working with the National Security Archive, reports on industry lobbying against Subpart W, the methane element of the US Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program. The piece contrasts oil and gas companies publicly urging the EPA to preserve federal greenhouse gas reporting with a documented private campaign, running more than a year, to weaken the revision to the methane reporting rule. Drawing on industry comments and public records, it reports that at a 2023 trade group meeting an energy analyst called the revised rule a likely public relations problem for companies because previously unreported emissions would have to be disclosed. A 2025 industry consultant predicted some companies' reported methane emissions could rise four to ten times under the new methodology, while another consultant in spring 2026 estimated an increase of roughly 16 percent. Gas producer EQT cited the revised rule as one reason its reported 2025 methane emissions rose.
Contested
Quotation
“"In 2025, an industry consultant predicted that some companies could see their reported methane emissions increase by four to 10 times under the rule's new methodology."”
DeSmog (in partnership with the National Security Archive) · all-rights-reserved · Read the original
All rights reserved. Only this short quotation is reproduced here.
The MyGreenSuit briefing
Commentary by MyGreenSuit, not the words of DeSmog (in partnership with the National Security Archive).
Hold the two numbers apart or this story falls over.
An industry consultant projected that some companies' reported methane could rise four to ten times under the revised Subpart W methodology. That is not a claim emissions rose. It is a claim the old measurement method was missing most of them. EQT's disclosure — reported 2025 methane up, with the rule change named as a reason — is the same phenomenon showing up in a real filing.
Which reframes the lobbying. If the objection to a measurement rule is that it makes your numbers look worse without changing what you emit, the objection is to being measured, and that is worth saying plainly.
It is equally worth saying that the agency has not covered itself in glory. A reporting rule that took this long to reflect what satellites had already demonstrated, and that is now being unpicked again, is a regulator that has been slow in both directions. Companies lobby; that is what companies do. Building a measurement record durable enough to survive a change of administration was the government's job, and it has not been done.
The consequence lands in Data Watch as much as here. If the methodology is weakened before the measurements are taken, a future fall in reported US methane becomes indistinguishable from a real improvement — and there is no longer a satellite flying to check it against.